Luke 15:1–2 (ESV): Now the tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him. 2 And the Pharisees and the scribes grumbled, saying, “This man receives sinners and eats with them.”
“Pharisee” is a term that many have come to use and think of synonymously with condemnation but it’s more than that. Why is that important? It’s important because we battle so much more than just “wrongness.” Here in Luke 15, the Pharisees give their best analysis of who Jesus is and how He measures up by looking at who he is seen with. Have you ever drawn a conclusion about anyone based on their associations? I have.
First, the writer mentions that “tax collectors and sinners were all drawing near to hear him.” It doesn’t say how large this group was. It only describes the (supposed) character of those who were listening. They’re not even charged with wrong thinking for choosing to listen to Jesus. Rather, the Pharisaical judgment is aimed at Jesus for permitting them an audience with Him. Apparently Jesus was supposed to teach only “good” people.
Now, we know without explanation that tax collectors are “bad” people. They take from the poor to give to the rich (or the government, if there’s a difference). We all seem to inherently resent those who are so employed. However, I have been told that these tax collectors were worse than that. These tax collectors were thieves with badges. Government thugs. Further, they were Jews (see Note 1,) who collected taxes for the Roman government so they were also traitors. Sellouts. No wonder they were despised and even hated.
Just imagine a system where instead of completing and filing a tax return with voluntary declarations you had to entertain a family member who made your declarations on your behalf and in your presence, without any evidence, and then assessed taxes at whatever rate he/she felt like assessing, pocketing whatever amount exceeded the actual amount owed. Imagine that. Would you love or trust that family member?
In v. 1, Dr Luke lumps the tax collectors and “sinners” together. In v. 2 he says that the judgment of the Pharisees was aimed at Jesus’ association with “sinners.” So, Pharisees did not distinguish between tax collectors and sinners. Perhaps the reason for this failure to distinguish was because of the “class divisions” of that day. We might expect Pharisees to see themselves as being part of the highest class while putting everyone else in some lesser class, whatever lower classes they may have considered. Sinners and tax collectors were undoubtedly (and perhaps speculatively) a part of the lowest class within the Jewish culture. (See Note 2.) Therefore, in the judgment of the Pharisees, Jesus was also in a lower class than they because he associated with these less then desirable characters.
The division of Jews, by Pharisees, into multiple “classes” of people changed and directly influenced their perspective on who and what these people were. It also impacted their views on other people based on the way in which these others interacted (or chose not to interact) with other classes. So, even if they didn’t take issue with Jesus or His teachings (and they did), His deliberate association with “tax collectors and (other) sinners” would be sufficient for them to question His character.
But Jesus doesn't share the perspective of the Pharisees. The worth that Pharisees put on a single human was not the value that HE sees. In His view of each individual being inherently valuable in and of themselves, Jesus compares himself to the shepherd who has lost just a single sheep from his flock. The shepherd, if his goals were merely financial, might be tempted to see the cost of going after a single sheep out of the flock as too expensive a proposition to be worth the effort. After all, aren't sheep rather stupid, at least by reputation? What about the relative value of a sheep that's always wandering off or who doesn't eat right. How motivated would such a shepherd be to go after a sheep who's disruptive, always dragging other sheep into trouble?
So, religion and the agents of religious institutions are less moral than Jesus in that they permit human, immoral perspectives to mandate who is valuable and who is not. Or, perhaps mandate who is more valuable as compared to someone who is less valuable. Are you assured that others would always put you in the category of MORE VALUABLE and thus that you would be worthy of effort? And what about the way that YOU look at other people? Do you categorize and classify others and then assess their worth based on how you feel about them and their character or based on who they choose to associate with? Jesus doesn't.
Although I wold love to think differently of myself, I know myself well enough to be certain that others, if they are honest with me, will have to acknowledge that I don't belong in the highest class as Pharisees saw themselves. Rather, I would be looked at as being of the lowest class. After all, if nothing else, I wore a policeman's badge for nearly 20 years. On that basis alone I would/should probably be viewed as a government thug. Not a high class position. Not a high class person.
But here's the thing: That's not how people ought to be viewed, judged or classified!
Jesus, in the parable in Luke 15, likens Himself to a shepherd and us to His flock of sheep. He doesn't differentiate between the individual sheep. In fact, he later tells a similar story about a lost coin. In both stories, He is referencing the fact that the shepherd of sheep and the owner of a coin place inherent value on that which belongs to them. Therefore, be it a lost coin or a lost sheep, the owner (and in this case the shepherd) searches tirelessly until the lost one is found and brought back home. Clearly, Jesus sees us this way. He doesn't conclude that since we are "only a penny" that we aren't worth the effort but that He would move all heaven and earth if we were a dime. Rather, we are simply coins or sheep and regardless of which we are or what value others may place on us, to Him only one thing matters. We are HIS. And that's enough.
Notes (Pocket Lexicon to the Greek New Testament):
1. τελώνης, collector (receiver) of customs, tax-gatherer, revenue official, of any rank, but especially of Jews of the lower rank, who collected revenue for the Roman overlord, detested by their fellow-countrymen and practically identified with ἁμαρτωλοί.
2. ἁμαρτωλός, (a) sinning, sinful; (b) frequent as a translation of a contemptuous Aramaic word, with reference to particular classes despised by strict Jews, a sinner.
Posts
